Vicarious Liability for Volunteers: Should Missouri Courts Consider New Standards

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Vicarious Liability for Volunteers: Should Missouri Courts Consider New Standards"

Transcription

1 Missouri Law Review Volume 63 Issue 3 Summer 1998 Article 7 Summer 1998 Vicarious Liability for Volunteers: Should Missouri Courts Consider New Standards Alicia K. Embley Follow this and additional works at: Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Alicia K. Embley, Vicarious Liability for Volunteers: Should Missouri Courts Consider New Standards, 63 Mo. L. Rev. (1998) Available at: This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at University of Missouri School of Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Missouri Law Review by an authorized administrator of University of Missouri School of Law Scholarship Repository.

2 Embley: Embley: Vicarious Liability for Volunteers: Vicarious Liability For Volunteers: Should Missouri Courts Consider New Standards? Woods v. Kelley' I. INTRODUCTION Modem tort law clearly requires employers to recognize and confront issues of vicarious liability for the negligence of their employees. Employers, however, may be more uncertain as to their exposure to liability for the negligence of their volunteers, as volunteers often decide the time, place, and manner in which they serve an organization. Nonetheless, volunteers also receive suggestions, advice, or directions from those who oversee the organization's daily operations. Volunteers may also utilize the organization's materials and equipment and are sometimes reimbursed for materials they purchase for the organization. For purposes of vicarious liability, will these volunteers be categorized as independent contractors, employees of the organization, or something else? Woods v. Kelley provides a prime opportunity to examine this issue in the context of a city's vicarious liability for the actions of a volunteer. The Kelley court discusses the circumstances under which a volunteer will be more like an independent contractor than a servant or employee. Although the court adopts no conclusive test for all volunteers, Kelley does provide guidance for future cases. II. FACTS AND HOLDING On September 11, 1993, Max Woods was killed in an automobile collision in Grandview, Missouri. 2 His wife, Margie Woods, was injured in the same accident. The driver of the other automobile involved in the accident, Catherine Kelley, had gone to a nursery to pick up some trees to plant at Shelton House, 4 an historic home owned by the City of Grandview. Kelley volunteered at Shelton House and served as a member of the Grandview Board of Aldermen. 6 Although the City of Grandview was aware of her volunteer efforts, Kelley often did not inform the city as to the nature of her S.W.2d 634 (Mo Ct. App. 1997). 2. Id. at Id. 4. Id. at 636. However, Kelley was unable to pick up the trees because the nursery was closed. Id. 5. Id. at Id. at 636. Kelley's volunteer efforts included landscaping and maintenance services. Id. Published by University of Missouri School of Law Scholarship Repository,

3 Missouri Law Review, Vol. 63, Iss. 3 [1998], Art. 7 MISSOURI LA WREVIEW [Vol. 63 services. 7 The City neither paid Kelley for her work nor expected her to perform work. 8 Nonetheless, the City occasionally reimbursed Kelley for her expenses, although she did not always submit expenses for reimbursement. 9 Kelley worked at Shelton House, independently of the city employees, without instruction or supervision.' 0 Max Woods' surviving children, Kimberly and Derek Woods, filed a wrongful death action against Kelley." Mrs. Woods also filed a claim for personal injuries. 12 The plaintiffs eventually settled their claims against Kelley and dropped her from the lawsuit. 13 However, they amended their petition to include the City of Grandview as a defendant. 14 In naming Grandview as a defendant, the plaintiffs asserted that Kelley was a "public employee" so as to invoke Missouri Revised Statute Section (1), which provides for waiver of sovereign immunity in certain circumstances.' 5 The plaintiffs also pursued a common law negligence claim against the City under the doctrine of vicarious liability.' 6 To establish the requisite "right to control" under both the statutory and common law claims, the plaintiffs argued that the City of Grandview clearly exercised and had the right to exercise ultimate control over Kelley's activities at Shelton House, specifically, those relating to maintenance and landscaping. 7 In support of their position, the Woods pointed to the City's ability to disapprove Kelley's expenditures, to refuse her volunteer services on a particular project, and to deny Kelley's services altogether. 18 The City of Grandview filed a motion for summary judgment and the Woods filed a motion for partial summary judgment.1 9 The Circuit Court of Jackson County granted summary judgment in favor of the City of Grandview, holding that the undisputed facts established that Kelley was not a "public employee" under Section , and that the statute was the sole means by which plaintiffs could recover Id. 8. Id. 9. Id. 10. Id. Kelley also had her own key to the premises. Id. 11. Id. at Id. 13. Id. 14. Id. 15. Id. at Missouri provides for sovereign immunity as existed at common law prior to September 12, 1977, except in cases of "[i]njuries directly resulting from the negligent acts or omissions by public employees arising out of the operation of motor vehicles or motorized vehicles within the course of their employment." Mo. REV. STAT (1) (1994). 16. Woods v. Kelley, 948 S.W.2d 634, 637 (Mo Ct. App. 1997). 17. Id. 18. Id. 19. Id. at Id. at

4 1998] Embley: Embley: Vicarious Liability for Volunteers: VICARIOUS LIABILITY FOR VOLUNTEERS. The Missouri Court of Appeals for the Western District affirmed the decision of the lower court. 2 ' The court held that a volunteer is not a public employee when the city does not control the method, manner, or means of the volunteer's services. 22 Furthermore, the court held that a city cannot be held liable for actions of a volunteer under common law theories of negligence, even with a statute waiving sovereign immunity, when the volunteer is not a public employee because such a volunteer cannot operate within the course or scope of employment or agency. 23 III. LEGAL BACKGROUND Missouri Revised Statute Section reveals that the doctrine of sovereign immunity remains in "full force and effect" in Missouri, shielding the sovereign from liability for negligent acts of its employees. 2 4 However, to soften the harsh effects of the doctrine, Section provides for an absolute waiver of immunity for injuries borne out of the operation of motor or motorized vehicles by "public employees., 2 ' To determine whether a volunteer fits within the definition of a public employee, Missouri applies the traditional common law doctrine of vicarious liability. 26 A. Vicarious Liability for Employees Missouri courts have traditionally applied the widely adopted "control approach" to determine whether the relationship of master-servant exists. 27 This approach examines whether the alleged master had the right to control the physical conduct of the other person. 28 Without a right to control, the alleged 21. Id. at Id. 23. Id. 24. Mo. REv. STAT (1994). 25. Mo. REv. STAT (1) (1994); see Woods v. Kelley, 948 S.W.2d 634, 637 (Mo. Ct. App. 1997). 26. Woods, 948 S.W.2d at 637. When searching for the meaning of "public employee" under Mo. REV. STAT (1) (1994), courts must "look to the traditional common law doctrine of vicarious liability, and its attendant definitions of master and servant" so as not to neglect the compensatory purpose of the statute. Bowman v. State, 763 S.W.2d 161, 164 (Mo. Ct. App. 1988). 27. See Dean v. Young, 396 S.W.2d 549, 553 (Mo. 1965) ("This element, control or right to control, is the element most frequently referred to in our cases distinguishing a servant from an independent contractor."); Gardner v. Simmons, 370 S.W.2d 359, 362 (Mo. 1963); Corder v. Morgan Roofing Co., 166 S.W.2d 455, 457 (Mo. 1942); Woods, 948 S.W.2d at 637; Wilson v. St. Louis Area Council, Boy Scouts of Am., 845 S.W.2d 568, 570 (Mo. Ct. App. 1992); Bowman, 763 S.W.2d at 163; Usrey v. Dr. Pepper Bottling Co., 385 S.W.2d 335, 339 (Mo. Ct. App. 1964). 28. Woods, 948 S.W.2d at 637 (citing Balderas v. Howe, 891 S.W.2d 871, Published by University of Missouri School of Law Scholarship Repository,

5 Missouri Law Review, Vol. 63, Iss. 3 [1998], Art. 7 MISSOURILA W REVIEW [Vol. 63 servant is an independent contractor.29 However, no one test is conclusive as to the master's "right to control. 30 Some Missouri cases look to the Restatement (Second) of Agency Section 220 to determine whether one acting for another is a servant. 3 1 The Restatement lists the following factors: a) the extent of control which, by the agreement, the master may exercise over the details of the work; b) whether or not the one employed is engaged in a distinct occupation of business; c) the kind of operation with reference to whether, in the locality, the work is usually done under direction of the employer or by a specialist without supervision; d) the skill required in the particular occupation; e) whether the employer or the workman supplies the instrumentalities, tools, and the place of work for the person doing the work; f) the length of time for which the person is employed; g) the method of payment, whether by time or by job; h) whether or not the work is part of the regular business of the employer; i) whether or not the parties believe they are creating the relationship of master and servant; and j) whether the principal is or is not in business. 2 Although the Restatement factors should be considered, "[t]he determining factor is not whether [the alleged master] actually exercised control over the work... but whether [the alleged master] had the right to exercise that control., 33 In Carter v. Wright,3 the Missouri Court of Appeals held that a worker was an "employee" under a theory of respondeat superior. 35 The worker's negligence occurred while the employee was hauling sheetrock for his employer. 36 The court examined the factors in the Restatement (Second) of (Mo. Ct. App. 1995)). 29. Hougland v. Pulitzer Publ'g Co., 939 S.W.2d 31, 33 (Mo. Ct. App. 1997). 30. Woods v. Kelley, 948 S.W.2d 634, 637 (Mo. Ct. App. 1997); see Sharp v. W. & W. Trucking Co., 421 S.W.2d 213, 220 (Mo. 1967) (citing Gardner v. Simmons, 370 S.W.2d 359, 361 (Mo. 1963)); Cloninger v. Wolfe, 477 S.W.2d 440, (Mo. Ct. App. 1972) (stating that "no one of the sundry elements which enter into a determination of the actual master-servant relationship is alone conclusive, and all must be viewed to see whether control, or a right of control has been retained over the alleged servant's physical conduct and details of the work"). 31. Carter v. Wright, 949 S.W.2d 157, 160 (Mo. Ct. App. 1997); Ferguson v. Pony Express Courier Corp., 898 S.W.2d 128, 132 (Mo. Ct. App. 1995); Pratt v. Reed & Brown Hauling Co., 361 S.W.2d 57, (Mo. Ct. App. 1962). 32. RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF AGENCY 220(2) (1958). 33. Pratt, 361 S.W.2d at S.W.2d 157 (Mo. Ct. App. 1997). 35. Id. at Id. 4

6 1998] Embley: Embley: Vicarious Liability for Volunteers: VICARIOUS LIABILITY FOR VOLUNTEERS Agency Section 220 and found that the employer had a right to control the actions of his employee. The right to control was established because the employer chose the dumpsite, gave the employee directions as to its location, supervised and worked with the employee, and the worker obeyed the employer. 38 The court also found the worker was not engaged in a distinct occupation, was paid by the hour, regularly worked for the employer, routinely took orders from the employer's supervisor, and that the work required a minimal degree of skill. 39 In Archer v. Outboard Marine Corp., 40 the Missouri Court of Appeals looked to whether the person sought to be charged as master had the right or power to control and direct the physical conduct of the servant. However, this case emphasized the quality of the control exerted by the alleged master over the servant. The court examined whether the right to control was "complete and unqualified," including control over the details of performance, 4 ' and held that a fishing tournament sponsor had not exercised sufficient control over a fishing toumament to render it vicariously liable for the death of a tournament contestant. 42 The plaintiffs proved that the sponsor exerted enough influence over the tournament to require implementation of safety requirements. 43 However, the court found that "the undisputed evidence establishe[d]" that the exerted influence was not based upon a right to control, but by "negotiation and persuasion.'a In other words, if the association hosting the tournament and its director had chosen to resist, the sponsor "would not have been able to exert its influence., 45 Only the association and its director had the authority to run, direct, and supervise the tournament; the director chose the sites, rules, and details. 46 Missouri case law indicates that Missouri courts use the "right to control" test to determine issues of vicarious liability and the Restatement factors provide helpful guidance in making these determinations. The findings of vicarious liability arise most frequently in cases concerning persons who were clearly paid employees, but such determinations become more elusive when unpaid volunteers, rather than traditional employees, are the negligent actors. 37. Id. 38. Id. at Id. at S.W.2d 701 (Mo. Ct. App. 1995). 41. Id. at Id. at Id. at Id. 45. Id. 46. Id. Published by University of Missouri School of Law Scholarship Repository,

7 Missouri Law Review, Vol. 63, Iss. 3 [1998], Art. 7 MISSOURI LA WREVIEW [Vol. 63 B. Vicarious Liability for Volunteers As with paid employees, Missouri recognizes that one who volunteers services 47 may create liability for a person or organization that' accepts the volunteer's services. 48 Like the traditional findings of a master-servant relationship, determination of liability lies in the right of the master to control the acts of the servant. 49 The requisite master-servant relationship is established when the alleged master "has the right to direct the method by which the master's service is performed." 50 In Wilson v. St. Louis Area Council Boy Scouts ofarmerica, 5 ' the Missouri Court of Appeals held that adult volunteer Boy Scout troop leaders were not servants or agents of the Boy Scouts of America when a member of a Boy Scout troop was killed on a trip to Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. 52 The court reasoned that the structure of the organization was such that the troop and its leaders were not required to get permission from the local council before participating in its activities. 3 The council neither ordered nor directed the troop or its leaders to go to Fort Leonard Wood, nor did the council know of the troop's excursion. 4 Like Missouri, other jurisdictions recognize the doctrine of respondeat superior for the torts of unpaid volunteers and take the position expressed in the Restatement (Second) of Agency Section 225 that "one who volunteers services without an agreement for or expectation of reward may be a servant of the one accepting such services." 55 The comments to the Restatement further clarify the rule, stating that the consent of the master, or the manifestation of consent, is required before the master-servant relationship is established. 5 6 Most 47. "Volunteer" is defined as: [O]ne who enters into service of his own free will; one who gives his services without any express or implied promise of remuneration; one who has no interest in the work, but nevertheless undertakes to assist therein; one who merely offers his services on his own free will, as opposed to one who is conscripted. Bond v. Cartwright Little League, Inc. 536 P.2d 697, 702 (Ariz. 1975). 48. Wilson v. St. Louis Area Council, Boy Scouts of Am., 845 S.W.2d 568, 571 (Mo. Ct. App. 1992) (citing Allan Manley, Annotation, Liability of Charitable Organization Under Respondeat Superior Doctrine for Tort of Unpaid Volunteer, 82 A.L.R.3d 1213, 1216 (1978)). 49. Id. 50. Woods v. Kelley, 948 S.W.2d 634, 638 (Mo. Ct. App. 1997) (citing Wilson, 845 S.W.2d at ) S.W.2d 568 (Mo. Ct. App. 1992). 52. Id. at Id. 54. Id. 55. Manley, supra note 48, at 1216 (citing RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF AGENCY 225 (1958)). 56. See Manley, supra note 48, at 1216 (citing RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF AGENCY 6

8 1998] Embley: Embley: Vicarious Liability for Volunteers: VICARIOUS LIABILITY FOR VOLUNTEERS jurisdictions also require that a charitable organization have the right to control the activities of its volunteers before finding a master-servant relationship. 7 In Scottsdale Jaycees v. Superior Court of Maricopa County, an Arizona Court of Appeals determined that a nonprofit organization, the Scottsdale Jaycees, was not liable under the doctrine of respondeat superior for the death and injuries sustained by passengers in an automobile accident." 9 The accident occurred while a delegate board member and his passengers were traveling to a board meeting. 9 The court questioned whether volunteers were servants or agents for a principal, 60 and determined that a volunteer who "consents or manifests consent to the existence of the relation by the person for whom the service is performed" may be a servant or agent for a principal. 61 The court also noted that a right to control is the necessary element in a master-servant relationship. 62 The Scottsdale Jaycees did consent to Cox acting as a volunteer delegate to the board meeting, 63 and until Cox arrived at the meeting and proceeded to exercise his duties as a delegate, the Jaycees could not exercise control over him. 6 Thus, the master-servant relationship did not exist while the member was merely traveling to the meeting. 65 Other courts also apply a "right to control" test to decide whether a masterservant relationship exists, but the question of liability does not ultimately depend on the right to direct the method by which the master's service is performed. 6 In Whetstone v. Dixon, 67 Dixon, a deacon of the Faith and Truth Baptist Church, drove his own truck to pick up materials to use in remodeling the church.6 While en route to obtain the materials, Dixon collided with another vehicle. 6 9 Although the Louisiana Court of Appeals ultimately reversed the trial 225 cmt. c (1958)). 57. See Evans v. Ohio State Univ., 680 N.E.2d 161, 174 (D. Ohio 1996); Manley, supra note 48, at P.2d 185 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1972). 59. Id. 60. Id. at Id. (citing RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF AGENCY 225 cmt. c (1958)). 62. Id. at Id. at Id. at Id. 66. See El Paso Laundry Co., v. Gonzales, 36 S.W.2d 793, 795 (Tex. Civ. App. 1931) (holding that the "the relation of master and servant exists whenever the employer retains the right to direct the manner in which the business shall be done, as well as the result to be accomplished... Inasmuch as the right to control involves the power to discharge, the existence of the power to discharge is essential, and is an indicium of the relation") So. 2d 764, 766 (La. Ct. App. 1993). 68. Id. 69. Id. Published by University of Missouri School of Law Scholarship Repository,

9 Missouri Law Review, Vol. 63, Iss. 3 [1998], Art. 7 MISSOURI LA WREVIEW [Vol. 63 court and found the church vicariously liable, 70 it looked to the same factors as the trial court did in reaching the decision. The court stated that whether a volunteer is a servant depends on the following: (1) whether the volunteer receives compensation; (2) the volunteer's status within the organization; (3) the volunteer's "specific mission;" (4) whether the relationship between the alleged servant and master is "intense;" (5) the extent of the alleged master's control over the volunteer; and (6) the role of the organization in conferring authority and exercising control over the volunteer and the direct benefit to the association. 7 ' According to the court, Dixon was "more than a casual volunteer;" 72 he assumed ongoing responsibilities for the church, and the church continued to delegate duties to him. 73 As a deacon, Dixon was closer to "executive status" than regular church membership. 74 On the day of the collision, Dixon made the trip at the request of the Board of Deacons, who designated the places to obtain the remodeling materials and the time by which delivery was expected. 75 Furthermore, the remodeling project was not an ordinary duty, but "a once in a lifetime project, intense in nature., 76 Finally, Dixon's activities produced a direct economic benefit to the church because the church saved money by sending its own members to pick up the materials instead of having the materials delivered. 77 Although courts such as those in Louisiana may look to many factors in determining when an organization or charitable institution is vicariously liable for the actions of its volunteers, the Woods v. Kelley court made its finding of non-liability based on the traditional "right to control" analysis. IV. INSTANT DECISION In Woods v. Kelley, the Missouri Court of Appeals found that the City of Grandview was not liable for Kelley's actions on either a statutory or common 70. Id. at 774. The court stated that "[i]f the facts presented in this case do not support a finding of vicarious liability, then we find it difficult to imagine a situation wherein vicarious liability could be imposed on a charitable organization for the acts of its volunteer." Id. at 772 n Id. at 770; cf Doe v. Roman Catholic Church, 602 So. 2d 129, 133 (La. Ct. App.) (holding that the right to control is determined by the following questions: "(1) the degree to which the charity orders the volunteer to perform various services, (2) the degree of contact between the charity and the volunteer, and (3) the structural hierarchy of the charity"), rev'd, 606 So. 2d 524 (La. 1992) 72. Whetstone v. Dixon, 616 So. 2d 764, 771 (La. Ct. App. 1993). 73. Id. at Id. 75. Id. at Id. at Id. 8

10 1998] Embley: Embley: Vicarious Liability for Volunteers: VICARIOUS LIABILITY FOR VOLUNTEERS law basis. 7 " The court found that although the City controlled the landscaping and maintenance services, knew of Kelley's services, had the right to terminate Kelley's volunteer efforts, and could refuse Kelley's expenditures, it had only general control over Kelley, or the type of control exercised over an independent contractor. 79 The court stated that a showing of much more specific and direct control was needed to create a "public employee relationship." 80 The plaintiff provided no evidence that the City controlled the manner, method, and means of Kelley's volunteer services. 8 " She volunteered to help with projects in which she wanted to participate, and the City of Grandview did not regulate the amount of hours or the dates on which she worked. 2 The City did not supervise or give instructions as to what services Kelley should perform or where she should 83 perform those services. Kelley di did not inform the City, prior to her arrival, of what services she would volunteer on a particular day. 84 In addition, although the City sometimes paid for Kelley's materials, she often paid for the materials herself, 85 The court concluded that the City of Grandview was not in control of Kelley's volunteer efforts. 86 As to the plaintiffs' common law claims of respondeat superior, the court declared the Woods' contention to be "moot. 8 7 The court reasoned that the plaintiffs could not recover under the common law theory if Kelley was not a "public employee" because Kelley could not have been operating within the scope of her employment. 88 V. COMMENT The importance of Woods v. Kelley lies in its analysis of how the doctrine of respondeat superior affects those who utilize the services of volunteers. The court in Kelley conceded that the City had control over most aspects of Kelley's volunteer services. The court found that the City of Grandview controlled Kelley's landscaping and maintenance services, knew of Kelley's services, had 78. Woods v. Kelley, 948 S.W.2d 634, 638 (Mo. Ct. App. 1997). The court also found that the city did not waive its sovereign immunity defense because Kelley did not fall within the definition of a "public employee" under Mo. REV. STAT (1) (1994). Id. 79. Id. at Id. 81. Id. at Id. 83. Id. 84. Id. 85. Id. 86. Id. 87. Id. 88. Id. Published by University of Missouri School of Law Scholarship Repository,

11 Missouri Law Review, Vol. 63, Iss. 3 [1998], Art. 7 MISSOURI LA WREVIEW [Vol. 63 the right to terminate Kelley's volunteer efforts, and could refuse Kelley's expenditures. 8 9 According to the court, "[t]his evidence establishes a general type of control over Kelley...,90 However, the court looked beyond this general "right to control" standard and required that the City exert "specific control" over the activity in which Kelley was engaged at the time the negligence occurred. This decision suggests that courts may be less willing to impose vicarious liability for the acts of volunteers than they would be for paid employees. From a policy standpoint, the imposition of liability for volunteers may cause organizations to cease using volunteers so that these organizations may avoid liability. This result would be detrimental to society, which benefits from volunteer work. On the other hand, the notion of burden shifting may weigh in favor of finding liability. Organizations which benefit from volunteer services may be in a better position to bear the risk of loss than the harmed individual. This risk can be offset by the purchase of insurance and may be distributed among other insured parties paying premiums in similar situations. Requiring organizations accepting volunteer services to bear the risk of loss will encourage organizations to better supervise their volunteers and reduce potential harms. By making it difficult to find vicarious liability for volunteers, courts give these organizations little incentive to protect against the negligence of their volunteers. Missouri's rule, apparently requiring that an alleged master's control over a volunteer's activities be "specific and direct"'" or "complete and unqualified," 92 should be softened to impose vicarious liability on organizations that acquiesce in receiving volunteer services. Volunteers that work for an organization without supervision may engage in the same types of risk activities that supervised, paid employees undertake. At least in the case of supervised, paid employees, the threat of liability induces the employer to minimize risks to others. If an organization can simply avoid liability by not supervising the activities of their volunteers, society and the volunteer must absorb the costs of the harm negligently caused by the volunteers who are acting to advance the interests of their organizations. The court should toughen the rules of vicarious liability by either of two routes: 1) treat volunteers like paid employees, or 2) use multi-factor tests similar to those applied in Louisiana. 93 What would the Missouri court have decided if Kelley had been paid for her services? Under the Whetstone factors, 94 the Kelley facts could make the City's 89. Id. at Id. 91. Id. 92. Id. at 638 (citing Archer v. Outboard Marine Corp., 908 S.W.2d 701, 703 (Mo. Ct. App. 1995)). 93. See Whetstone v. Dixon, 616 So. 2d 764, 766 (La Ct. App. 1993); Doe v. Roman Catholic Church, 602 So. 2d 129, 133 (La. Ct. App.), rev'd, 606 So. 2d 524 (La. 1992). 94. Whetstone, 616 So. 2d at

12 1998] Embley: Embley: Vicarious Liability for Volunteers: VICARIOUS LIABILITY FOR VOLUNTEERS vicarious liability a submissible jury question. The City had ultimate control over the landscaping and maintenance services at Shelton House and could approve and reimburse Kelley for her expenditures. 9 Furthermore, Kelley provided a direct economic benefit to the City on the day of the accident. The fact that a volunteer's services benefit an organization should be a significant consideration in determining vicarious liability. When the organization benefits from and knows of the volunteer's services, the organization should bear the risk of injury to others. This would be a particularly useful strategy in cases where the facts would not otherwise support a finding of vicarious liability. The reasons why such a finding becomes more difficult in the case of volunteers is unclear. Arguably, the standard for finding vicarious liability should not be more stringent for the acts of volunteers. VI. CONCLUSION For the moment, organizations that use volunteers should examine the extent of their control over their volunteers to determine their risk of vicarious liability. The solution for organizations to avoid liability may be for the organization to exert no specific control over the acts of volunteers. Nonetheless, future public policy considerations may prompt Missouri courts to find vicarious liability more readily in cases involving volunteers. ALICIA K. EMBLEY 95. Woods v. Kelley, 948 S.W.2d 634, 637 (Mo. Ct. App. 1997). Published by University of Missouri School of Law Scholarship Repository,

13 Missouri Law Review, Vol. 63, Iss. 3 [1998], Art

STATE OF MISSOURI TRANSPORTATION COMPENDIUM OF LAW

STATE OF MISSOURI TRANSPORTATION COMPENDIUM OF LAW STATE OF MISSOURI TRANSPORTATION COMPENDIUM OF LAW Kevin L. Fritz Patrick E. Foppe Lashly & Baer, P.C. 714 Locust Street St. Louis, MO 63101 Tel: (314) 436-8309 Email: klfritz@lashlybaer.com pfoppe@lashlybaer.com

More information

Plaintiff, Donna Krickl, appeals from the order of the circuit court granting summary

Plaintiff, Donna Krickl, appeals from the order of the circuit court granting summary SECOND DIVISION June 15, 2010 No. 1-09-2454 DONNA K. KRICKL, ) Appeal from ) the Circuit Court Plaintiff-Appellant, ) of Cook County. ) v. ) ) GIRL SCOUTS, ILLINOIS CROSSROADS ) COUNCIL, INC., ) No. 07

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON November 18, 2015 Session

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON November 18, 2015 Session IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON November 18, 2015 Session MELANIE JONES, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF MATTHEW H. v. SHAVONNA RACHELLE WINDHAM, ET AL. Direct Appeal from the Circuit Court

More information

SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS No. CV

SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS No. CV SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS No. CV-14-864 CENTRAL FLYING SERVICE, INC., AND CAL FREENEY PETITIONERS V. PULASKI COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT RESPONDENT Opinion Delivered FEBRUARY 19, 2015 P E T I T I O N F O R W

More information

v. Record No OPINION BY JUSTICE CYNTHIA D. KINSER September 16, 2005 MEDICORP HEALTH SYSTEM, d/b/a MARY WASHINGTON HOSPITAL, INC.

v. Record No OPINION BY JUSTICE CYNTHIA D. KINSER September 16, 2005 MEDICORP HEALTH SYSTEM, d/b/a MARY WASHINGTON HOSPITAL, INC. Present: All the Justices LEASLY SANCHEZ v. Record No. 042741 OPINION BY JUSTICE CYNTHIA D. KINSER September 16, 2005 MEDICORP HEALTH SYSTEM, d/b/a MARY WASHINGTON HOSPITAL, INC. FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT

More information

Indiana Rejoins Minority Permitting Negligent Hiring Claims Even Where Respondeat Superior is Admitted

Indiana Rejoins Minority Permitting Negligent Hiring Claims Even Where Respondeat Superior is Admitted www.pavlacklawfirm.com September 30 2016 by: Colin E. Flora Associate Civil Litigation Attorney Indiana Rejoins Minority Permitting Negligent Hiring Claims Even Where Respondeat Superior is Admitted This

More information

Are the IPI Instructions on Construction Negligence an Accurate Statement of Illinois Law?

Are the IPI Instructions on Construction Negligence an Accurate Statement of Illinois Law? Feature Article Judge Donald J. O Brien, Jr. (ret.) * Johnson & Bell, Ltd., Chicago Are the IPI Instructions on Construction Negligence an Accurate Statement of Illinois Law? The current version of the

More information

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS XIN WU and NINA SHUE, Plaintiffs, UNPUBLISHED March 15, 2011 and WILLIAM LANSAT, as Personal Representative of the Estate of SOL-IL SU, Plaintiff-Appellant, v No. 294250

More information

Torts - Federal Tort Claims Act - Government Liability for Torts of Servicement. Williams v. United States, 352 F.2d 477 (1965)

Torts - Federal Tort Claims Act - Government Liability for Torts of Servicement. Williams v. United States, 352 F.2d 477 (1965) William & Mary Law Review Volume 7 Issue 2 Article 23 Torts - Federal Tort Claims Act - Government Liability for Torts of Servicement. Williams v. United States, 352 F.2d 477 (1965) Kent Millikan Repository

More information

Insurance - Is the Liability Carrier Liable for Punitive Damages Awarded by the Jury?

Insurance - Is the Liability Carrier Liable for Punitive Damages Awarded by the Jury? William & Mary Law Review Volume 4 Issue 2 Article 15 Insurance - Is the Liability Carrier Liable for Punitive Damages Awarded by the Jury? M. Elvin Byler Repository Citation M. Elvin Byler, Insurance

More information

Chapter Two AGENCY A. INTRODUCTION 1

Chapter Two AGENCY A. INTRODUCTION 1 Chapter Two AGENCY A. INTRODUCTION 1 Basic agency and employment relationships underlay virtually all commercial dealings in the modern world. Agency relationships by and large do not themselves create

More information

Waiver of Liability Clauses for Personal Injuries in Railroad Free Passes

Waiver of Liability Clauses for Personal Injuries in Railroad Free Passes The Ohio State University Knowledge Bank kb.osu.edu Ohio State Law Journal (Moritz College of Law) Ohio State Law Journal: Volume 22, Issue 1 (1961) 1961 Waiver of Liability Clauses for Personal Injuries

More information

Res Judicata Personal Injury and Vehicle Property Damage Arising from a Single Accident

Res Judicata Personal Injury and Vehicle Property Damage Arising from a Single Accident Nebraska Law Review Volume 40 Issue 3 Article 12 1961 Res Judicata Personal Injury and Vehicle Property Damage Arising from a Single Accident John Ilich Jr. University of Nebraska College of Law Follow

More information

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA TRANSPORTATION COMPENDIUM OF LAW

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA TRANSPORTATION COMPENDIUM OF LAW STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA TRANSPORTATION COMPENDIUM OF LAW Randall R. Adams Kevin M. Ceglowski Poyner Spruill LLP 130 S. Franklin St. Rocky Mount, NC 27804 Tel: (252) 972 7094 Email: rradams@poynerspruill.com

More information

PUBLISH UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT. Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. No UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

PUBLISH UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT. Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. No UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit June 28, 2016 PUBLISH Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT JAMES NELSON, and ELIZABETH VARNEY, Plaintiffs-Appellees,

More information

Follow this and additional works at: Part of the Law Commons

Follow this and additional works at:  Part of the Law Commons Case Western Reserve Law Review Volume 16 Issue 4 1965 Agency--Tort Liability of an Ohio Employer for Acts of His Servant--Acts of a Third Person Assisting a Servant (Fox v. Triplett Auto Wrecking, Inc.,

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF UTAH. ----oo0oo---- Celso Magana and Yolanda Magana, No Plaintiffs and Petitioners,

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF UTAH. ----oo0oo---- Celso Magana and Yolanda Magana, No Plaintiffs and Petitioners, 2009 UT 45 This opinion is subject to revision before final publication in the Pacific Reporter. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF UTAH ----oo0oo---- Celso Magana and Yolanda Magana, No. 20080629 Plaintiffs

More information

CASENOTE. LAWATYOURFINGERTIPS By James G. Randall, Esq

CASENOTE. LAWATYOURFINGERTIPS By James G. Randall, Esq CASENOTE LAWATYOURFINGERTIPS By James G. Randall, Esq Employer not liable for accident of employee who was returning from a dentist appointment while on her lunch break and driving her own vehicle Filed

More information

Plaintiff, for his cause of action against Defendants, alleges that: PARTIES

Plaintiff, for his cause of action against Defendants, alleges that: PARTIES STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF RAMSEY DISTRICT COURT SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT Doe 29, Plaintiff, Case Type: Personal Injury Court File No. : vs. The National Boy Scouts of America Foundation d/b/a The Boy

More information

Liability for criminal acts of employees

Liability for criminal acts of employees Liability for criminal acts of employees Carrie Meigs Teague Campbell Dennis & Gorham, L.L.P. KNOW YOUR LEGAL OBLIGATIONS Derivative Liability Respondeat Superior What does it mean? Let the master answer

More information

STATE OF MICHIGAN TRANSPORTATION COMPENDIUM OF LAW

STATE OF MICHIGAN TRANSPORTATION COMPENDIUM OF LAW STATE OF MICHIGAN TRANSPORTATION COMPENDIUM OF LAW Paul E. Scheidemantel Eric Shih Clark Hill PLC 500 Woodward Avenue Suite 3500 Detroit, MI 48226-3435 Phone: (313) 965-8310 Email: pscheidemantel@clarkhill.com

More information

ESPINOZA V. SCHULENBURG: ARIZONA ADOPTS THE RESCUE DOCTRINE AND FIREFIGHTER S RULE

ESPINOZA V. SCHULENBURG: ARIZONA ADOPTS THE RESCUE DOCTRINE AND FIREFIGHTER S RULE ESPINOZA V. SCHULENBURG: ARIZONA ADOPTS THE RESCUE DOCTRINE AND FIREFIGHTER S RULE Kiel Berry INTRODUCTION The rescue doctrine permits an injured rescuer to recover damages from the individual whose tortious

More information

Kyles v. Celadon Trucking Servs.

Kyles v. Celadon Trucking Servs. Kyles v. Celadon Trucking Servs. United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri, Southern Division October 19, 2015, Decided; October 19, 2015, Filed Case No. 6:15-cv-03193-MDH Reporter

More information

THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE MICHAEL PORTER. CITY OF MANCHESTER & a. Argued: January 18, 2007 Opinion Issued: April 5, 2007

THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE MICHAEL PORTER. CITY OF MANCHESTER & a. Argued: January 18, 2007 Opinion Issued: April 5, 2007 NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for rehearing under Rule 22 as well as formal revision before publication in the New Hampshire Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter, Supreme

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION. ) ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) No. 4:15CV01370 AGF MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION. ) ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) No. 4:15CV01370 AGF MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Stars Investment Group, LLC et al v. AT&T Corp. et al Doc. 93 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION STARS INVESTMENT GROUP, LLC and STAR S DESIGN GROUP, INC., ) ) )

More information

Caddell et al v. Oakley Trucking Inc et al Doc. 53. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COr RT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS. MEMORANDUM OPINION and ORDER

Caddell et al v. Oakley Trucking Inc et al Doc. 53. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COr RT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS. MEMORANDUM OPINION and ORDER Caddell et al v. Oakley Trucking Inc et al Doc. 53 r---. @Iセ Al ゥヲ N IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COr RT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS NsN ゥャセ@ ョゥ ste セ ct@ COL!1T I セ ortierz @ ll!strlctoftexas INO "''U

More information

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS LISA BERRY, Plaintiff-Appellant, UNPUBLISHED July 22, 2003 V No. 235475 Oakland Circuit Court BARTON-MALOW CO. and BARTON-MALOW LC No. 00-020107-NO ENTERPRISES, INC.,

More information

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA TRANSPORTATION COMPENDIUM OF LAW

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA TRANSPORTATION COMPENDIUM OF LAW DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA TRANSPORTATION COMPENDIUM OF LAW Tamara B. Goorevitz Franklin & Prokopik, P.C. 2 North Charles Street Suite 600 Baltimore, MD 21201 Tel: (410) 230 3625 Email: tgoorevitz@fandpnet.com

More information

Torts--Willful and Wanton Misconduct When Driving While Intoxicated

Torts--Willful and Wanton Misconduct When Driving While Intoxicated Case Western Reserve Law Review Volume 11 Issue 4 1960 Torts--Willful and Wanton Misconduct When Driving While Intoxicated Myron L. Joseph Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/caselrev

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON 1 1 William A. Barton, OSB No. Kevin K. Strever, OSB No. BARTON & STREVER, P.C. P.O. Box 0 Newport, OR Telephone: (1) - Facsimile: (1) - E-Mail: bartonstrever@actionnet.net Jeffrey R. Anderson, MSB No.

More information

I Can't Get No Satisfaction: Missouri Requires Non-Settling Defendants to Plead and Prove Prior Settlements as an Affirmative Defense

I Can't Get No Satisfaction: Missouri Requires Non-Settling Defendants to Plead and Prove Prior Settlements as an Affirmative Defense Missouri Law Review Volume 69 Issue 3 Summer 2004 Article 5 Summer 2004 I Can't Get No Satisfaction: Missouri Requires Non-Settling Defendants to Plead and Prove Prior Settlements as an Affirmative Defense

More information

Torts - Duty of Occupier to Social Guests

Torts - Duty of Occupier to Social Guests Louisiana Law Review Volume 19 Number 4 June 1959 Torts - Duty of Occupier to Social Guests Ben W. Lightfoot Repository Citation Ben W. Lightfoot, Torts - Duty of Occupier to Social Guests, 19 La. L. Rev.

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON October 26, 2006 Session

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON October 26, 2006 Session IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON October 26, 2006 Session JERRY PETERSON, ET AL. v. HENRY COUNTY GENERAL HOSPITAL DISTRICT, ET AL. A Direct Appeal from the Circuit Court for Henry County

More information

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS LARRY KLEIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, UNPUBLISHED January 19, 2016 v No. 323755 Wayne Circuit Court ROSEMARY KING, DERRICK ROE, JOHN LC No. 13-003902-NI DOE, and ALLSTATE

More information

Galanda Broadman, PLLC, Occasional Paper

Galanda Broadman, PLLC, Occasional Paper Galanda Broadman, PLLC, Occasional Paper No Good Deed Goes Unpunished: Personal Liability Exposure for Tribal Officials in the Wake of Maxwell v. County of San Diego By Scott Wheat and Amber Penn-Roco

More information

COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS

COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS 2017COA36 Court of Appeals No. 16CA0224 City and County of Denver District Court No. 14CV34778 Honorable Morris B. Hoffman, Judge Faith Leah Tancrede, Plaintiff-Appellant, v.

More information

JENNIFER MONROE, A SINGLE WOMAN, Plaintiff/Appellant, BASIS SCHOOL, INC., AN ARIZONA CORPORATION, Defendant/Appellee.

JENNIFER MONROE, A SINGLE WOMAN, Plaintiff/Appellant, BASIS SCHOOL, INC., AN ARIZONA CORPORATION, Defendant/Appellee. IN THE ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION TWO JENNIFER MONROE, A SINGLE WOMAN, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. BASIS SCHOOL, INC., AN ARIZONA CORPORATION, Defendant/Appellee. No. 2 CA-CV 2013-0047 Filed February

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF ARIZONA DIVISION ONE

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF ARIZONA DIVISION ONE NOTICE: THIS DECISION DOES NOT CREATE LEGAL PRECEDENT AND MAY NOT BE CITED EXCEPT AS AUTHORIZED BY APPLICABLE RULES. See Ariz. R. Supreme Court 111(c); ARCAP 28(c); Ariz. R. Crim. P. 31.24 IN THE COURT

More information

244 LAW JOURNAL -MARCH, 1939

244 LAW JOURNAL -MARCH, 1939 NOTES AND COMMENTS 243 8 per cent per annum; loans by non-licensees of less than $300.00 at more than 8 per cent per annum), and (2) the statute is a police regulation, State v. Powers, 125 Ohio St. io8,

More information

Follow this and additional works at:

Follow this and additional works at: St. John's Law Review Volume 60 Issue 4 Volume 60, Summer 1986, Number 4 Article 15 June 2012 A Common Carrier, Whether Municipally or Privately Owned, May Be Liable for the Failure of Its Employees to

More information

September 27, 1982 ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINION NO Gregory 0. Clark Chief of Police Ness City Police impartment Ness City, Kansas 67560

September 27, 1982 ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINION NO Gregory 0. Clark Chief of Police Ness City Police impartment Ness City, Kansas 67560 September 27, 1982 ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINION NO. 82-215 Gregory 0. Clark Chief of Police Ness City Police impartment Ness City, Kansas 67560 Re: State Departments; Public Officers, Employees -- Kansas Tort

More information

No COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO 1978-NMCA-081, 92 N.M. 112, 583 P.2d 476 August 15, 1978 COUNSEL

No COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO 1978-NMCA-081, 92 N.M. 112, 583 P.2d 476 August 15, 1978 COUNSEL GUTIERREZ V. ARTESIA PUB. SCH., 1978-NMCA-081, 92 N.M. 112, 583 P.2d 476 (Ct. App. 1978) Alicia GUTIERREZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, vs. ARTESIA PUBLIC SCHOOLS and Travelers Insurance Company, Insurer, Defendants-Appellees.

More information

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA TRANSPORTATION COMPENDIUM OF LAW

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA TRANSPORTATION COMPENDIUM OF LAW COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA TRANSPORTATION COMPENDIUM OF LAW Prepared by John T. Pion Timothy Smith Lauren M. Despot Pion, Nerone, Girman, Winslow & Smith, P.C. 420 Fort Duquesne Boulevard 1500 One Gateway

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE September 1, 2011 Session at Knoxville

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE September 1, 2011 Session at Knoxville IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE September 1, 2011 Session at Knoxville MICHAEL LIND v. BEAMAN DODGE, INC., d/b/a BEAMAN DODGE CHRYSLER JEEP ET AL. Appeal by Permission from the Court of

More information

Maryland tort lawyers may need to re-think their understanding of

Maryland tort lawyers may need to re-think their understanding of 4 Maryland Bar Journal September 2014 The Evolution of Pro Rata Contribution and Apportionment Among Joint Tort-Feasors By M. Natalie McSherry Maryland tort lawyers may need to re-think their understanding

More information

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS JOSEPH KOSMALSKI and KATHY KOSMALSKI, on behalf of MARILYN KOSMALSKI, a Minor, FOR PUBLICATION March 4, 2004 9:05 a.m. Plaintiffs-Appellants, v No. 240663 Ogemaw Circuit

More information

Torts - Liability of Automobile Owner for Driver's Negligence

Torts - Liability of Automobile Owner for Driver's Negligence Louisiana Law Review Volume 12 Number 3 March 1952 Torts - Liability of Automobile Owner for Driver's Negligence Garner R. Miller Repository Citation Garner R. Miller, Torts - Liability of Automobile Owner

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE Filed 12/30/11 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE KIMBLY ARNOLD, v. Plaintiff and Appellant, MUTUAL OF OMAHA INSURANCE COMPANY,

More information

STATE OF INDIANA TRANSPORTATION COMPENDIUM OF LAW

STATE OF INDIANA TRANSPORTATION COMPENDIUM OF LAW STATE OF INDIANA TRANSPORTATION COMPENDIUM OF LAW Phil L. Isenbarger Bingham McHale, LLP 2700 Market Tower 10 West Market Street Indianapolis, IN 46204 Tel: (317) 968 5389 E mail: pisenbarger@binghammchale.com

More information

Before Judges Espinosa and Suter. On appeal from Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Hudson County, Docket No. L

Before Judges Espinosa and Suter. On appeal from Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Hudson County, Docket No. L NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court." Although it is posted on the internet, this opinion is binding

More information

CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE

CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE Filed 4/13/17 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE MICHAEL J. SUMRALL et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. MODERN ALLOYS,

More information

2013 STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA TRANSPORTATION COMPENDIUM OF LAW

2013 STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA TRANSPORTATION COMPENDIUM OF LAW 2013 STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA TRANSPORTATION COMPENDIUM OF LAW Mark S. Barrow, Esq. P. Jason Reynolds, Esq. Sweeny, Wingate and Barrow, P.A. 1515 Lady Street Columbia, SC 29211 Tel: (803) 256-2233 Email:

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE January 5, 2010 Session

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE January 5, 2010 Session IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE January 5, 2010 Session EDUARDO SANTANDER, Plaintiff-Appellee, AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE CO., Intervenor-Appellant, v. OSCAR R. LOPEZ, Defendant Appeal from

More information

COUNSEL JUDGES. Carmody, Justice. Chavez and Moise, JJ., concur. Compton, C.J., and Noble, J., not participating. AUTHOR: CARMODY OPINION

COUNSEL JUDGES. Carmody, Justice. Chavez and Moise, JJ., concur. Compton, C.J., and Noble, J., not participating. AUTHOR: CARMODY OPINION BROWN V. ARAPAHOE DRILLING CO., 1962-NMSC-051, 70 N.M. 99, 370 P.2d 816 (S. Ct. 1962) Bessie BROWN, Widow of Edward Lee Brown, Deceased, and parent of David Clyde Brown, Randy Lee Brown and Robert Donald

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs February 19, 2008

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs February 19, 2008 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs February 19, 2008 CHERYL L. GRAY v. ALEX V. MITSKY, ET AL. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Davidson County No. 03C-2835 Hamilton V.

More information

COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL DENIED WHERE MASTER AND SERVANT HELD NOT TO BE IN PRIVITY

COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL DENIED WHERE MASTER AND SERVANT HELD NOT TO BE IN PRIVITY COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL DENIED WHERE MASTER AND SERVANT HELD NOT TO BE IN PRIVITY Schimke v. Earley 173 Ohio St. 521, 184 N.E.2d 209 (1962) Plaintiff-administratrix commenced two wrongful death actions to

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE September 15, 2008 Session. JAMES CONDRA and SABRA CONDRA v. BRADLEY COUNTY, TENNESSEE

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE September 15, 2008 Session. JAMES CONDRA and SABRA CONDRA v. BRADLEY COUNTY, TENNESSEE IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE September 15, 2008 Session JAMES CONDRA and SABRA CONDRA v. BRADLEY COUNTY, TENNESSEE Direct Appeal from the Circuit Court for Bradley County No. V02342H

More information

2009 WI APP 144 COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION

2009 WI APP 144 COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION 2009 WI APP 144 COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION Case No.: 2008AP1517 Petitions for review filed Complete Title of Case: JAMES CAPE & SONS COMPANY, BY ITS RECEIVER MICHAEL S. POLSKY, V.

More information

Illinois Official Reports

Illinois Official Reports Illinois Official Reports Appellate Court Schrempf, Kelly, Napp & Darr, Ltd. v. Carpenters Health & Welfare Trust Fund, 2015 IL App (5th) 130413 Appellate Court Caption SCHREMPF, KELLY, NAPP AND DARR,

More information

COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS 2013 COA 156

COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS 2013 COA 156 COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS 2013 COA 156 Court of Appeals No. 12CA1875 City and County of Denver District Court No. 11CV4480 Honorable Herbert L. Stern, III, Judge Martin Rieger, Plaintiff-Appellant, v.

More information

EMPLOYMENT RELATIONSHIP LIABILITY OF EMPLOYER FOR NEGLIGENCE IN HIRING, SUPERVISION OR RETENTION 1 OF AN EMPLOYEE.

EMPLOYMENT RELATIONSHIP LIABILITY OF EMPLOYER FOR NEGLIGENCE IN HIRING, SUPERVISION OR RETENTION 1 OF AN EMPLOYEE. Page 1 of 7 SUPERVISION OR RETENTION 1 OF AN EMPLOYEE. The (state issue number) reads: Was the plaintiff [injured] [damaged] by the negligence 2 of the defendant in [hiring] [supervising] [retaining] (state

More information

Torts - Liability of Owner for the Negligent Driving of Automobile Thief

Torts - Liability of Owner for the Negligent Driving of Automobile Thief Louisiana Law Review Volume 22 Number 4 Symposium: Louisiana and the Civil Law June 1962 Torts - Liability of Owner for the Negligent Driving of Automobile Thief Frank Fontenot Repository Citation Frank

More information

Customer will bring an action against Businessman under a negligence theory.

Customer will bring an action against Businessman under a negligence theory. Customer (C) v. Businessman (B) Customer will bring an action against Businessman under a negligence theory. Negligence requires a Breach of a Duty that Causes Damages. A. Duty B had a duty to drive as

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS 444444444444 NO. 11-0686 444444444444 TEXAS ADJUTANT GENERAL S OFFICE, PETITIONER, v. MICHELE NGAKOUE, RESPONDENT 4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444 ON PETITION

More information

STATE OF TEXAS TRANSPORTATION COMPENDIUM OF LAW

STATE OF TEXAS TRANSPORTATION COMPENDIUM OF LAW STATE OF TEXAS TRANSPORTATION COMPENDIUM OF LAW Greg C. Wilkins Christopher A. McKinney Orgain Bell & Tucker, LLP 470 Orleans Street P.O. Box 1751 Beaumont, TX 77704 Tel: (409) 838 6412 Email: gcw@obt.com

More information

STATE OF MISSISSIPPI TRANSPORTATION COMPENDIUM OF LAW

STATE OF MISSISSIPPI TRANSPORTATION COMPENDIUM OF LAW STATE OF MISSISSIPPI TRANSPORTATION COMPENDIUM OF LAW Douglas Bagwell Robert Briggs Carr Allison 14231 Seaway Road Building 2000, Suite 2001 Gulfport, MS 39503 Tel: (228) 864 1060 Email: dbagwell@carrallison.com

More information

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWELFTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, IN AND FOR MANATEE COUNTY CIRCUIT CIVIL DIVISION

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWELFTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, IN AND FOR MANATEE COUNTY CIRCUIT CIVIL DIVISION IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWELFTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, IN AND FOR MANATEE COUNTY CIRCUIT CIVIL DIVISION Plaintiff, TIMOTHY YOUNG, as Personal Representative of the Estate of ALLEN

More information

THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE DENNIS G. HUCKINS. MARK MCSWEENEY & a. Argued: February 12, 2014 Opinion Issued: April 11, 2014

THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE DENNIS G. HUCKINS. MARK MCSWEENEY & a. Argued: February 12, 2014 Opinion Issued: April 11, 2014 NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for rehearing under Rule 22 as well as formal revision before publication in the New Hampshire Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter, Supreme

More information

CPLR 3215(e): Predemand Complaint Viewed As Sufficient to Satisfy Requirements for Entry of Default Judgment

CPLR 3215(e): Predemand Complaint Viewed As Sufficient to Satisfy Requirements for Entry of Default Judgment St. John's Law Review Volume 50 Issue 3 Volume 50, Spring 1976, Number 3 Article 17 August 2012 CPLR 3215(e): Predemand Complaint Viewed As Sufficient to Satisfy Requirements for Entry of Default Judgment

More information

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS TIMOTHY BYZEWSKI and KATHLEEN BYZEWSKI, UNPUBLISHED January 20, 2004 Plaintiffs-Appellants, v No. 242676 Oakland Circuit Court AEROTEK, INC., and GENERAL MOTORS LC No.

More information

Look Mom, I Can Do It on My Own: A Child's Independent Right to Recover Medical Expenses in Missouri

Look Mom, I Can Do It on My Own: A Child's Independent Right to Recover Medical Expenses in Missouri Missouri Law Review Volume 61 Issue 3 Summer 1996 Article 8 Summer 1996 Look Mom, I Can Do It on My Own: A Child's Independent Right to Recover Medical Expenses in Missouri Mark A. Reiter Follow this and

More information

Labor Law - Conflict Between State Anti-Trust Law and Collective Bargaining Agreement

Labor Law - Conflict Between State Anti-Trust Law and Collective Bargaining Agreement Louisiana Law Review Volume 19 Number 4 June 1959 Labor Law - Conflict Between State Anti-Trust Law and Collective Bargaining Agreement Aubrey McCleary Repository Citation Aubrey McCleary, Labor Law -

More information

D-1-GN Cause No. v. JUDICIAL DISTRICT

D-1-GN Cause No. v. JUDICIAL DISTRICT D-1-GN-16-000986 Cause No. 3/7/2016 9:41:36 AM Velva L. Price District Clerk Travis County D-1-GN-16-000986 Ruben Tamez CHRISTOPHER IRA JACKSON, Individually, As Representative of the Estate of BLAKE JACKSON,

More information

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN AND FOR KENT COUNTY

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN AND FOR KENT COUNTY IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN AND FOR KENT COUNTY BRET AND PATTY SHEPARD and ) JASON, BRYAN, LOUISE AND ) PATRICK PAULEY, ) 00C-08-042 ) (Consolidated) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) ) KIMBERLY

More information

Robert F. Bouw, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Cuddy Mutual Insurance. Company and Leopold Jerger, Defendants-Appellants

Robert F. Bouw, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Cuddy Mutual Insurance. Company and Leopold Jerger, Defendants-Appellants Robert F. Bouw, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Cuddy Mutual Insurance Company and Leopold Jerger, Defendants-Appellants PRT 508 Case #2 June 9, 2014 Sherard Clinkscales 1.) SUMMARY The alleged incident took

More information

Boston College Journal of Law & Social Justice

Boston College Journal of Law & Social Justice Boston College Journal of Law & Social Justice Volume 36 Issue 3 Electronic Supplement Article 4 April 2016 A Tort Report: Christ v. Exxon Mobil and the Extension of the Discovery Rule to Third-Party Representatives

More information

KOHL V. CITY OF PHOENIX: CLARIFYING THE SCOPE OF ABSOLUTE MUNICIPAL IMMUNITY

KOHL V. CITY OF PHOENIX: CLARIFYING THE SCOPE OF ABSOLUTE MUNICIPAL IMMUNITY KOHL V. CITY OF PHOENIX: CLARIFYING THE SCOPE OF ABSOLUTE MUNICIPAL IMMUNITY Meredith K. Marder INTRODUCTION In Kohl v. City of Phoenix, the Arizona Supreme Court considered the extent of municipal immunity

More information

Commonwealth Of Kentucky. Court of Appeals

Commonwealth Of Kentucky. Court of Appeals RENDERED: August 29, 2003; 2:00 p.m. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED Commonwealth Of Kentucky Court of Appeals NO. 2002-CA-001637-MR SHAWN SHOFNER and STEPHANIE SHOFNER, Individually, and as the Administratrix of

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS 444444444444 NO. 11-0213 444444444444 COINMACH CORP. F/K/A SOLON AUTOMATED SERVICES, INC., PETITIONER, v. ASPENWOOD APARTMENT CORP., RESPONDENT 4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444

More information

In this case we must decide whether Kentucky law or Illinois law governs a lawsuit arising

In this case we must decide whether Kentucky law or Illinois law governs a lawsuit arising Third Division September 29, 2010 No. 1-09-2888 MARIA MENDEZ, as Special Administrator for the Estate ) Appeal from the of Jaime Mendez, Deceased, ) Circuit Court of ) Cook County Plaintiff-Appellant,

More information

DC PLAINTIFFS' ORIGINAL PETITION COME NOW, PLAINTIFFS DEE VOIGT, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS

DC PLAINTIFFS' ORIGINAL PETITION COME NOW, PLAINTIFFS DEE VOIGT, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS 4-CIT/CERT MAIL CAUSE NO. DC-17-02842 FILED DALLAS COUNTY 3/8/2017 4:47:47 PM FELICIA PITRE DISTRICT CLERK Jesse Reyes Dee Voigt, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Peggy Hoffman, Deceased,

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE October 11, 2016 Session

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE October 11, 2016 Session IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE October 11, 2016 Session TERRY JUSTIN VAUGHN v. CITY OF TULLAHOMA, ET AL. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Coffee County No. 42013 Vanessa A. Jackson,

More information

Products Liability in Montana: At Last a Word on Defense

Products Liability in Montana: At Last a Word on Defense Montana Law Review Volume 40 Issue 2 Summer 1979 Article 5 July 1979 Products Liability in Montana: At Last a Word on Defense Sharon M. Morrison University of Montana School of Law Follow this and additional

More information

STATE OF DELAWARE TRANSPORTATION COMPENDIUM OF LAW

STATE OF DELAWARE TRANSPORTATION COMPENDIUM OF LAW STATE OF DELAWARE TRANSPORTATION COMPENDIUM OF LAW Prepared by James W. Semple Cooch and Taylor The Brandywine Building 1000 West Street, Tenth Floor Wilmington DE, 19899 Tel: (302)984-3842 Email: jsemple@coochtaylor.com

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Judge Christine M. Arguello

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Judge Christine M. Arguello -BNB Larrieu v. Best Buy Stores, L.P. Doc. 49 Civil Action No. 10-cv-01883-CMA-BNB GARY LARRIEU, v. Plaintiff, BEST BUY STORES, L.P., Defendant. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF

More information

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT * FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit JOEL ROBERTS; ROBYN ROBERTS, Plaintiffs-Appellants, FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT September 28, 2012 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk

More information

Case 1:17-cv LG-RHW Document 42 Filed 03/19/18 Page 1 of 8

Case 1:17-cv LG-RHW Document 42 Filed 03/19/18 Page 1 of 8 Case 1:17-cv-00083-LG-RHW Document 42 Filed 03/19/18 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI SOUTHERN DIVISION JESSICA C. McGLOTHIN PLAINTIFF v. CAUSE NO.

More information

No SUPREME COURT OF NEW MEXICO 1974-NMSC-086, 87 N.M. 25, 528 P.2d 884 November 08, Motion for Rehearing Denied December 11, 1974 COUNSEL

No SUPREME COURT OF NEW MEXICO 1974-NMSC-086, 87 N.M. 25, 528 P.2d 884 November 08, Motion for Rehearing Denied December 11, 1974 COUNSEL 1 WATERMAN V. CIESIELSKI, 1974-NMSC-086, 87 N.M. 25, 528 P.2d 884 (S. Ct. 1974) Jack WATERMAN, a partner, d/b/a Tucumcari Ice Company, a partnership, Petitioner, vs. George CIESIELSKI, Respondent. No.

More information

Vicarious Liability Of A Corporate Employer For Punitive Damages

Vicarious Liability Of A Corporate Employer For Punitive Damages Rumberger, Kirk & Caldwell, P.A. (United States) Vicarious Liability Of A Corporate Employer For Punitive Damages 16 February 2012 By Mr Jeffrey Lam All too often, a corporate employer is sued for negligence

More information

CASENOTE CAL-OSHA REGULATIONS APPLY TO A LANDLORD WHO HIRES AN UNLICENSED PERSON TO PAINT HIS RENTAL PROPERTY BY JAMES G. RANDALL LAWATYOURFINGERTIPS

CASENOTE CAL-OSHA REGULATIONS APPLY TO A LANDLORD WHO HIRES AN UNLICENSED PERSON TO PAINT HIS RENTAL PROPERTY BY JAMES G. RANDALL LAWATYOURFINGERTIPS CASENOTE CAL-OSHA REGULATIONS APPLY TO A LANDLORD WHO HIRES AN UNLICENSED PERSON TO PAINT HIS RENTAL PROPERTY BY JAMES G. RANDALL LAWATYOURFINGERTIPS Unlike a homeowner hiring one to do work on his personal

More information

THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SARAH EVERITT. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY & a. Argued: May 14, 2009 Opinion Issued: August 7, 2009

THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SARAH EVERITT. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY & a. Argued: May 14, 2009 Opinion Issued: August 7, 2009 NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for rehearing under Rule 22 as well as formal revision before publication in the New Hampshire Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter, Supreme

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs April 21, 2011

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs April 21, 2011 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs April 21, 2011 ANNE LAVOIE and JODEE LAVOIE v. FRANKLIN COUNTY PUBLISHING COMPANY, INC. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Franklin County

More information

Department of State Health Services. Summary of Statutory Provisions Affecting the Liability of Providers in a Public Health Emergency September 2009

Department of State Health Services. Summary of Statutory Provisions Affecting the Liability of Providers in a Public Health Emergency September 2009 Department of State Health Services Summary of Statutory Provisions Affecting the Liability of Providers in a Public Health Emergency September 2009 Prepared and Updated by the Office of General Counsel

More information

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JULY TERM v. CASE NO. 5D

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JULY TERM v. CASE NO. 5D GEORGE GIONIS, IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JULY TERM 2001 Appellant, v. CASE NO. 5D00-2748 HEADWEST, INC., et al, Appellees. / Opinion filed November 16, 2001

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE December 9, 2002 Session

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE December 9, 2002 Session IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE December 9, 2002 Session MICHAEL D. MATTHEWS v. NATASHA STORY, ET AL. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hawkins County No. 10381/5300J John K. Wilson,

More information

P H I L L I P S DAYES

P H I L L I P S DAYES Case :-cv-0000-nvw Document Filed 0/0/ Page of 0 P H I L L I P S DAYES NATIONAL EMPLOYMENT LAW FIRM A Professional Corporation 0 North Central Avenue, Suite 00 Phoenix, Arizona 0 Telephone: -00-JOB-LAWS

More information

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF CLAY COUNTY, LIBERTY, MISSOURI. Case No. Division

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF CLAY COUNTY, LIBERTY, MISSOURI. Case No. Division IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF CLAY COUNTY, LIBERTY, MISSOURI SALLY G. HURT, City, State, ZIP And SUSAN G. HURT, City, Street, ZIP Case No. Division Plaintiffs, v. JOHN DOE Serve at: City, State, Zip Defendant.

More information

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JANUARY TERM v. Case No. 5D

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JANUARY TERM v. Case No. 5D IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JANUARY TERM 2013 WANDA I. ROMAN, Individually, And as a Personal Representative of the ESTATE OF LUIS ANGEL VALENTIN, Deceased and

More information

STATE OF MINNESOTA TRANSPORTATION COMPENDIUM OF LAW

STATE OF MINNESOTA TRANSPORTATION COMPENDIUM OF LAW STATE OF MINNESOTA TRANSPORTATION COMPENDIUM OF LAW Mark A. Solheim Larson King, LLP 2800 Wells Fargo Place 30 East Seventh Street St. Paul, MN 55101 Tel: (651) 312 6500 Email: msolheim@larsonking.com

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE July 12, 2005 Session

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE July 12, 2005 Session IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE July 12, 2005 Session RHONDA D. DUNCAN v. ROSE M. LLOYD, ET AL. Direct Appeal from the Circuit Court for Davidson County No. 01C-1459 Walter C. Kurtz,

More information